We from CFCtruth welcome the news
today that the club have made an offer for the Battersea Power Station site and
have revealed ambitious and visionary plans for a new stadium. As we said in
our blog posted earlier today, we were aware that this was the BPS bid deadline
day and we were cautiously optimistic that the club would make an offer.
The initial reaction to the announcement from fans have been
overwhelmingly positive with particular enthusiasm being shown for the plan for
a 15,000 capacity, single-tier stand for home fans and the apparent
determination of the club to avoid a generic (but cheap) bowl design. We at
CFCtruth also welcome this acknowledgement of fans’ preferences and an
understanding by the club of what works and what doesn’t in modern stadia
design.
The idea of moving stadiums does not seem to be a major
concern for most Chelsea supporters. They recognise, as we do, that Stamford
Bridge is too small a ground to build sustained domestic and European success
from and also understand that the site remains hugely restricted in terms of
potential expansion. It is also clear that almost everyone likes the proposed
new location. Battersea is widely considered historical Chelsea-territory and
the idea of stadium both adjacent to a building like the Power Station and next
to the Thames offers the potential for a truly iconic, world-class stadium
design.
Of course there are naysayers – people who would rather give
up football forever than consider a move from Stamford Bridge. And there are those
who remain convinced that this is all part of an elaborate master plan by the
owners and board of Chelsea FC to ‘steal the club away from its true
fans’. For now, we believe these people
can safely be ignored – we consider it a very optimistic sign that so many CPO
‘No’ voters at last autumn’s EGM have already come out and said that this is a
plan that they feel they could support. But that is a battle that the club must
win at some point in order for these plans to move forward – they will still
need to secure 75% of CPO votes at a future EGM. Let us all hope that this
process is better handled by the club next time.
And of course that is not the only obstacle that these plans
will need to overcome. There are
reportedly many other bidders for the site including some very well known and prosperous
developers. Not just that but it also appears that Wandsworth Council are
unconvinced that the site is right for stadium and reports
suggest the Mayor’s Office has also expressed its scepticism (its concerns
mainly seem to focus on transport issues). We hope that the club’s detailed
plans not just for the stadium but for the regeneration of the whole area can
convince them that this plan is a ‘goer’.
So the process will continue for the next few months until a
decision is made on the preferred bidder for the site. CFCtruth will follow the
process as it unfolds as well as any potential knock-on effects elsewhere. For
example, we do wonder exactly what Hammersmith & Fulham are now thinking
about the club’s Battersea plan and the potential economic loss for the
borough. Equally, could CapCo be considering ‘what might have been’ for the
Earls Court site if Chelsea do go ahead and choose a different path? Just
speculation for now but we do wonder whether this announcement might not focus
the minds of certain other parties and give them a chance to reconsider their
options before it is too late...
No comments:
Post a Comment